Today
Sections
More
Features
Thursday, June 17, 2010
We love bargains more than privacy
There is an excellent article in Business Insider, "Here's Why You're Going To Give In And Start Using Foursquare And Groupon Whether You Like It Or Not," which explains why we consumers so blithely give personal information to any retailer who wants it:
Check-in apps are rapidly becoming more focused on deals -- coupons and discounts that are only available to people using these services. Loopt CEO Sam Altman describes his new app as "a virtual loyalty card" for participating businesses.
Loyalty cards -- the ones you whip out at Safeway or CVS -- have effectively set up two sets of prices: One for the regular consumers, one lower set for the consumers who willingly let the companies track your buying patterns via the card. And now, the tradeoff between personal information and pennies on the dollar will move into other areas, like where you happen to be every day.
At what point do you decide your privacy is more valuable than the demographic or purchasing information you give up for discounts? Tell us at dollarsandsense@sfgate.com.
| Jun 17 at 01:39 PM
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
We're all spending more! Or less! Or more!
Last Friday, the U.S. Commerce Department reported that retail sales dropped for the first time in seven months.
There were some interesting tidbits among the government data: middle-class shoppers are cutting back, but upper-income shoppers are back in the saddle. Without the federal incentives to buy houses or energy-efficient appliances, people didn't shop at much at places like Home Depot & Lowe's. (Sales were down 9.3%.) Lower-than-expected gasoline prices pulled down the sales figures for gas stations. But people did spend more in electronics & appliances, furniture and sporting good stores.
The slowdown in total retail spending isn't all bad news. The Washington Post reported:
A preliminary June survey released Friday by the University of Michigan-Reuters found that they feel better about the economy than they have since January 2008. The index increased to 75.5 from 73.6 in May, with improvements in consumers' assessment of their current situations and their outlook for the future.
CNBC thinks the recent data on spending and consumer sentiment isn't really indicative of any long-term softness in shopping. A lot of analysts think the May sales data may, in fact, be the pause before another uptick in consumer activity.
The thing I'm always curious about: How closely the national retail sales figures match local shopping patterns -- or individual ones. So let's gather some anecdata. How are you shopping these days? Share at dollarsandsense@sfgate.com.
| Jun 16 at 10:34 AM
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
When Mom & Dad are the landlords
Bundle.com recently had a post outlining some interesting new household statistics:
Today a whopping one in eight people ages 22 to 29 has moved home because of the recession. Indeed, 70% of those who live with their parents are under 30.
A product of the recession? In part, yes: more than 20% of 20somethings were unemployed last year. But another reason folks may be reluctant to leave the nest: "They're spending just as their independent-living peers would, without the squeeze of the monthly bills."
Surely this can't fly in all households that have a recent grad back in their old bedroom. Yesterday, Apartment Therapy ran a post asking "Moving Back Home: Who Pays Household Expenses?" Their suggestion: "Within the first week of moving back, initiate the conversation regarding household expenses. It is important to know what the monthly expenses are and how much each person is going to contribute."
The suggestions in the comments on how to keep the peace -- personal and financial -- are also worth reviewing.
Did your kids move back home after they got out of school? Or did you move back in with your folks after college? How did your family handle sharing household expenses? Share your experiences -- and Do's and Don'ts -- with dollarsandsense@sfgate.com.
| Jun 15 at 10:05 AM
Monday, June 14, 2010
You're worth $136.38 to your favorite brand
Thanks to a blog post on GigaOm, I got a chance to read a report by Syncapse that points out some very interesting things about consumers who are Facebook fans of specific brands.
For example: people who declare themselves to be fans of a specific brand (a cleaner, a restaurant, a coffee chain) spend approximately $71.84 per year more than non-fans. This may be one for the Duh ... files -- obviously, people who are fans of a brand will be more likely to buy things from the brand.
The gap in spending among Facebook fans vs. Facebook non-faces was particularly striking among some brands: Dove's Facebook fans spent an average of $141.76 per year, while nonfans spent only 40% of that with $57.02. This is far greater than Axe body spray ($101.48 for fans vs. $61.87 for non-fans), or for Secret ($89.11 for fans vs. $54.20 for non-fans). So not all brands on Facebook are created equal -- some have found a way to engage their customers in an especially effective way.
But to get back to the question posted in the title of the post: the Syncapse survey also found that people who became brand fans of a given product/retailer/restaurant on Facebook spent, on average, $136.38 more than non-fans. Again -- this could suggest that brand fans online would have spent more anyway. However, some people become brand fans in order to get freebies or go coupon-collecting.
This circles back around to prior blog posts about brand loyalty. We all know it's probably not the most prudent use of our financial resources -- but things like this Facebook survey suggest that we can start putting a price on what our brand loyalty costs us.
| Jun 14 at 01:40 PM
Thursday, June 10, 2010
"A car is an expense, not an asset"
When I bought my first car in 1996, I armed myself with a copy of Consumer Reports' annual automotive issue, and my friend Elliott, who is one of the shrewdest negotiators I know. As we walked out of one showroom after a spiel from a salesman exhorting me to "invest" $20K into a car, Elliott said, "Always remember: a car is an expense, not an asset."
He's right. Cars rarely appreciate over time. They require regular refueling, regular maintenance (so as to prevent more expensive repairs later) and regular insurance payments. And, if you do not own your car(s) outright, they also require regular payments to a lender -- which means you're also paying interest on something that's worth less than what you paid for it from the minute you leave the lot. (Quoth Carsdirect: "When you drive a car off the lot, you have agreed to pay the dealer a certain amount of money for the car. Even if you only drive it down the road and change your mind, you are now looking at a car that is only worth the wholesale value. The wholesale value is always less than the original retail value of the car.")
So why do we stick with something that, according to MSN Money, contributes to the average $8600 per year that households spend on transportation costs?
For one thing, it's hard to go carless in the U.S. According to urbanism professor Witold Rybczynski:
There are only six American downtown districts that are dense enough to support mass transit, which you need if you're going to be carless: New York City (Midtown and Downtown), Chicago, Philadelphia, Boston and San Francisco. That's it.
If you don't live in those places, living without a car can be challenging. Not impossible, but challenging.
But even if you've minimized your auto expenses, there's always the rising costs of public transit -- in the SF Bay Area, the cost of riding public transit has doubled since 1997. And as of July 1, even carpoolers will be paying tolls on most of our bridges.
Do you know how much you spend in transportation costs -- car-related and public transit-related -- every year? How do you keep the expenses from getting out of control? Share your strategies at dollarsandsense@sfgate.com.
| Jun 10 at 09:47 AM
Wednesday, June 09, 2010
Excellent read: "How to Hype-Proof Your Tween"
We had my nephews over recently and when the TV flickered on for a moment, the kids were able to recite, word for word, the exact script of an infomercial. I was both frightened and impressed by how quickly a commercial message can sink in for small children.
A recent Good Housekeeping article, "How to Hype-Proof Your Tween," reports that children ages 8-12 are spending about $50 billion on their own every year, and their parents and loved ones drop another $170 billion on them. And while the Children's Television Act of 1990 limits commercial time to no more than 12 minutes per hour during kids' programs on weekdays, there are not a lot of constraints on print commercials, websites and mobile applications.
The article outlines some strategies for inoculating your kids -- and yourself -- against the overt or subliminal pressure to spend. Among the strategies: teach your kids to be critical thinkers, point out product placement, and set prearranged limits on spending so your kids have some say in shopping trips, along with the understanding of the opportunity costs that their decisions incur.
You can also sit down with your kids and go through the site Don't Buy It, courtesy of PBS Kids. But the article's got one last tip for parents -- put the kids on a media diet. It's hard to succumb to the lures of a TV ad when you don't watch TV.
The media diet works for adults too. The fewer opportunities you have to absorb consumer culture via TV and glossies, the fewer times you'll be tempted to just pick up some new trinket.
| Jun 09 at 02:21 PM
Thursday, June 03, 2010
Say goodbye to plastic bags in California
The California Assembly voted 41 to 27 to ban single-use plastic grocery bags, and the bill is expected to pass the senate and get signed by Gov. Schwartzenegger. Should it pass, you'll have to bring reusable bags to the store or pay at least 5 cents apiece for recycled paper bags when getting your goods bagged.
As a bring-your-own bagger, this doesn't really affect me on a "how to schlepp my stuff" basis, but I am curious as to how places that give you money back when you bring your own bags will respond. How much money can stores make off people who will shrug, "Whatever. It's only a quarter to bag all these groceries?"
We've talked about tote bags in the past. In March, after blogging about Washington, D.C. and Baltimore's tentative plans to charge shoppers for bags, you all had plenty to say on bringing your own bag.
| Jun 03 at 01:31 PM
Friday, May 28, 2010
We love generics!
Say you're at the grocery store. You've got to buy a jar of orange marmalade (for a recipe, for example) and it's not on sale. Do you automatically reach for a brand you know, or reach for the store brand?
Chances are good you're reaching for the generic jar. Ipsos Marketing recently conducted a survey that found:
More than 80 percent of survey respondents said that private label products were 'the same as or better than' branded products for taste, convenience, trustworthiness, and being environmentally friendly - as well as providing good value for money (89 percent).
Why are store brands (AKA generics) surging? Credit the recession, which prompted people to pare back their expenses in any comparatively painless way they could.
How does news like this affect you? Prepare for a surge of brand-name advertising meant to create an emotional connection between you and the brand -- or meant to remind you of the way you used to feel about a specific brand. Emotional consumers are more likely to upgrade brands than shoppers who look at their purchases from a purely functional perspective.
I know many, many people who swear by Diet Coke and reject all other diet colas. There are associations there beyond taste -- it's an emotional attachment.
Here's the thing I'm curious about: Do you have brand names you'll pay for? Are there specific products where you just won't go generic? Share what they are -- and why you love them -- at dollarsandsense@sfgate.com.
| May 28 at 10:24 AM
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Shipping costs: the price you pay to reduce stress
Internet Retailer reported recently that shoppers who checked out products in stores before buying online were less satisfied with their purchases than people who researched their purchases online, then bought them in a store.
One of the reasons people were dissatisfied: after finding the item in a store at one price, they were often unable to find the same item online for the same price. The question I had after reading the article: Whether people who research in-store before buying online factor shipping costs into what they're willing to pay online versus what they'll pay in person.
I have friends who hate shopping in person and love e-commerce; their way of dealing with shipping costs is to figure it's a convenience tax. They don't have to leave the house, they don't have to tramp up and down the aisles in a store, they don't have to deal with human beings, and their stuff gets dropped at their door. I also have friends who refuse to pay for shipping, figuring that they'll either hit Freeshipping.org for bargains or work an item's pickup into their regular automotive errands.
Where do you stand on shipping and e-commerce? Is a shipping fee a small price to pay for convenience or a sucker fee? Share your opinion at dollarsandsense@sfgate.com.
| May 27 at 09:57 AM
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Thrifty baseball lovers, clear your Tuesday nights
How many of you head down to San Jose to see the Giants play? No, that's not a typo; I'm alluding to the minor-league team.
Now how many of you eat Kraft singles? If you're in the little overlapping part of the Venn diagram composed of "Kraft Singles eaters" and "minor league baseball fans," then save a few cheese package wrappers, grab a friend and clear the following days for a buy one, get one free ticket package:
Tuesday, June 1: playing the Rancho Cucamonga Earthquakes
Tuesday, June 8: playing the Modesto Nuts
Tuesday, July 20: playing the Stockton Ports
Tuesday, August 3: playing the Stockton Ports
Tuesday, August 24: playing the Visalia Rawhide
Tuesday, August 31: playing the Inland Empire 66ers
| May 26 at 03:15 PM
Dollars and Sense is about finding new ways to inject dollars, cents and sensibility into your everyday spending.
By Lisa Schmeiser, Read Bio
advertisement
|
your ad here
Print grocery coupons and save at a store
close to you.
$2.00 off on any one (1) HORMEL Party Tray
Expires on: 12/31/2010
Get more coupons on 
more